From the WSJ at http://tinyurl.com/34kfayg comes “Big Insurance; Big Medicine”. Highlights include:
ObamaCare's once and future harms have been well chronicled, but the major effects so far are less obvious and arguably more important: A wave of consolidation is washing over the health markets, and the result is going to be higher costs.

ObamaCare was sold using the language of choice and competition, but it is actually reducing both.

a major goal of ObamaCare is to convert [insurers] into de facto public utilities ... bankruptcies are likely. Investors and Wall Street analysts are now predicting a lost decade for health insurance stocks.

Doctors are selling [private practices] because complying with the ever-growing list of mandates has become more cumbersome ... physicians … lose the autonomy of independent practice. The other problem is price controls in Medicare ... two-thirds of hospitals lose money today on Medicare inpatient services, according to Medicare.

no one should entertain the illusion that [Obamacare] will reduce costs perforce and "bend the curve." In fact, the most concrete effect of this wave of consolidation may be to increase private health spending significantly.

[Obamacare’s] consolidation wave is churning the insurance markets and reshaping clinical medicine with almost no public scrutiny. A rational system would give consumers an incentive to reward those [providers or insurers] that innovate and deliver higher quality at lower cost … ObamaCare is already moving the U.S. even further from the rational world, and this forced retreat will continue the longer it is left in place.

Iso asks the question-then answers his question by providing an opinion for some imaginary person who was created on the radio.
Now he will ask more questions and then answer them, not noticing everyone left the party because of him. As the lights grow dimmer, he is OK. He can still hear the radio.....
but the question still remains Why does he bother supplying opinions to others when no one is paying any attention?

Nor can he view the rebuttals , because he has plonked most of us. My hope is that a rebuttal of mine will get quoted by someone who has not been plonked. Somebody quote this: ISO I WILL BUY YOU A NEW ZX IF YOU LET ME BACK INTO YOUR WEB!

No problem.He reads all your posts and answers them at times. You guys are too well informed in your specialities for a guy like him to debate. When he tried it was embarrassing, so he did the pretend ostrich thing.
I understand why-he had no other choice to make himself seem always right to himself.
Now he just supplies your dumb opinion and then his brilliant repost, back and forth until it all fades away and he "won"

Well gang, it has become glaringly obvious that Mike, even after all of his odiferous pontificating about conservative morality and values, will not and is not going to be forthright.

I personally find it fricking hilarious that the guy brow beats anyone who hasn’t had a “real job” a.k.a worked in the private sector. He despises unions and social programs of any kind, yet was a government employee for his entire career and now draws disability. Apparently Mike doesn’t like who he really is.

I sometimes wonder if iso is as ignorant as he seems, or if he merely believes that repeating a talk radio canard often enough will make it true. On taxes and the redistribution of wealth. If Obama, Pelosi, and us liberals are all really socialists, then so was Thomas Jefferson. He believed in progressive taxation, or that the primary source of taxation should be those with the most disposable income. Here are a couple of quotes, with sources:

Quote:

"Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by the individual." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1784. FE 4:15, Papers 7:557

Fairness and Uniformity
"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785. ME 19:18, Papers 8:682

Next, turn to his claim that cutting taxes increases revenue. A comment like this makes me wonder what kind of an engineer Mike Fick was. In the literature of tax cuts, it does appear that the significant cuts in the marginal rates during the Kennedy administration actually led to an increase in revenue. That is attributed to the fact that the marginal rates were so high--about 90% if memory serves, that people who made a lot of money spent a lot of energy using loopholes. With significantly lower tax rates, about half, the use of loopholes declined and revenues went up. For the remaining tax cuts, revenues went down. Revenues increased over time, but not as much as they would have with the higher rates. Of course, rigorous analysis considers different rates of economic growth, but rigor is not a term I would use to describe anything offered here by Mikey.

Tax decreases can, but don't always, increase job formation. It depends on who gets the cut, and what they do with the money. In a consumer society, cuts that get a larger amount of money circulating generate multiplier effects. Cuts that stimulate investment in US jobs also have job benefits--even if they go to the very rich. But those that go only to the investor class, with no incentives to invest in American jobs, don't do as well. That, my friends, is the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Bush tax cuts were weighted to the very high earners, and I've seen nothing to convince me that they did a thing to slow or reverse the outsourcing of jobs.

But go ahead and elect politicians who made their billions in outsourcing, see how it works.

Well i just hope the business strategies of outsourcing is not used for political agenda. Everyone is using it or referring outsourcing to negative economic impact yet more of the American entrepreneur as well as employees are outsourcing their task to India and Philippines. Outsourcing is not for entrepreneurs alone but for those graduate of accountancy, human resources, all IT works, legal and even medical.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum